Re: Opinions on Lightroom

Originally Posted by Glenn NK

I've been using it since LR1, and I'm not fully conversant with all of its power and usefulness. It has a "bit" of a learning curve. One day of use won't enable anyone to judge a programs capabilities.

There are many very good photographers that use nothing else. Check around on other photo forums.

As for corrupted databases, my first folder is 2006-09-25. Nothing has ever been corrupted to date. Perhaps failing to make backups has been the problem. But this isn't a software failure, it's a universal human failure.

Black BG's? Try a few hours of CAD with a white screen and then you'll know what eyestrain is.

I'm using LR 4.1, had it for about two months. Slowly gone through earlier versions textural how to books, finally picked up the latest version. Still willing to give it a shot, although I do most of my editing in Elements.

Then you can just import your files into a new catalogue. I use this as part of my workflow so I don't have to sync the catalogue/database between two machines.

Given that you can select these options in addition to the catalogue backup, integrity test and optimisation each time you exit LR then I can't think of anything else that Adobe could have done to provide belt and braces.

Cheers,
A

P.S. Should have jumped on this earlier when reading comments about how vulnerable your work was in LR. However the outright hostility in Richards initial post towards something he hadn't taken the time to understand has prompted me into action!

Re: Opinions on Lightroom

. . . one of the fatal flaws in the Lightroom design. . . . I would have preferred that they offer the sidecar xmp file approach used by Bridge / ACR and left the RAW file untouched.

No doubt you are here referring to DNG files but the uninitiated might misunderstand. As it happens, DNG aside, Lightroom does offer the sidecar approach - it's a simple pref setting. I have it set that way and if I open a folder of x newly imported images I will find x*2 files. Even without the sidecars, under no circumstances are the raw files modified. The major disconnect is that edits (i.e., last state of all parameters) and some metadata go into the sidecar while the edit history (i.e., the order in which those final states were achieved) and most catalogue info stay in the catalogue. Part of DNGs purpose seems to be to make it possible to put the raw file in a container along with its edits and all other pertinent info and thus render it portable - more portable than having to transmit an associated sidecar to make one's editing intentions clear.

Re: Opinions on Lightroom

I'm going to rename it Eyestrain 5.3. Like many other recent image editors, AND THIS FORUM, black background and grayish font. Who decided that modern means illegible?

In LR you can change the background colours at will

Originally Posted by Richard Lundberg

...
Eyestrain 5.3 also violates another principle. Sliders should be able to be incremented numerically with arrow clicks, but noooooooooo. I would bet the UI designers for all these apps are geeks who have never heard of human engineering.

You may just use arrow clicks on the keyboard. It's all in the help menus and manual.
Fairly difficult, I think, to make a judgement on any substantial piece of software (or any equipment for that matter) on a cursory examination.
Just my 2¢
Tim

Re: Opinions on Lightroom

Yes I am hostile to any application that uses a black background UI. My old eyes can't handle it. Any such app should have the capability to change to conventional. I like Aperture, what ever its faults may be, because it is readable.
Thanks for the tip about the up/down key, however unintuitive that is.

Re: Opinions on Lightroom

Originally Posted by Richard Lundberg

Yes I am hostile to any application that uses a black background UI. My old eyes can't handle it. Any such app should have the capability to change to conventional. I like Aperture, what ever its faults may be, because it is readable.

Cool - problem solved then

Those who like Aperture can use Aperture, and those who use LR can use LR.

Re: Opinions on Lightroom

Threads like this always bring to mind a mock review published by a video game magazine back in the very early days of the industry. Frustrated that other magazines were publishing reviews (not previews) of games they hadn't played (because they weren't even finished) they published a mock review written by someone who saw a game through a shop window from the top deck of a double decker bus that was driving past.

I have never been bothered by the font size in Lightroom so I never looked to see if it was adjustable. After reading this thread it took me all of a minute to find the correct place in Preferences to adjust it.

Re: Opinions on Lightroom

I have tried Lightroom (albeit Version 3) and never really liked it for a number of reasons. I am quite happy with using Photoshop CS6 and Adobe Bridge. Perhaps I did not give LR3 a decent chance but, when something is working just fine (in this case, CS6 + Bridge) why try to fix it?

BTW: I also tried PSE10 and absolutely HATED it's cataloging. You are supposed to be able to work with PSE10 without having to let that program do your cataloging but, each time I attempted to do that; the program crashed and I would need to re-install it.

OTOH, if a person doesn't have CS6, adding the Perfect Photo Suite will allow working with layers and masking, as well as having a lot of other handy bells and whistles. I would expect that a combination of Lightroom and onOne Perfect Photo Suite would give a person some powerful editing capability at a reasonable price. But, speaking of price, I got my full Photoshop CS6 including Bridge for $250 USD when Adobe was selling off its last boxed sets of CS6!

Re: Opinions on Lightroom

Originally Posted by chauncey

It should go without saying that the Develop module in LR is the same as Bridge/ACR.

It may use the same "engine" but ACR has additional features. As an example, on the tone curve in ACR, I use the parametric adjustment tab; no such equivilent in Lightroom. As well the sliders are much shorter (and therefore harder to use) in LR than in ACR.

Bridge is an integrated browser, but adjustments have to be made in ACR or Photoshop.

Re: Opinions on Lightroom

Manfred,

AFAIK, LR will do what the ACR parametric tab lets you do. It has the same little markers at the bottom of the graph that allow you to redefine the boundaries of the regions (shadows, highlights, etc.), and the same sliders to adjust them. Or is there something else on the parametric adjustment tab?

Re: Opinions on Lightroom

It may use the same "engine" but ACR has additional features. As an example, on the tone curve in ACR, I use the parametric adjustment tab; no such equivilent in Lightroom. As well the sliders are much shorter (and therefore harder to use) in LR than in ACR.

Aah...you can grab the left border of the develop module and pull it left to enlarge it.

Re: Opinions on Lightroom

Originally Posted by DanK

Manfred,

AFAIK, LR will do what the ACR parametric tab lets you do. It has the same little markers at the bottom of the graph that allow you to redefine the boundaries of the regions (shadows, highlights, etc.), and the same sliders to adjust them. Or is there something else on the parametric adjustment tab?

Dan

I had another look, yes, they've combined the parametrica and point modes into a single interface. It's just a lot larger in ACR, so more accurate to use.

As I said before, they have a common engine across the two products, but the implementations are not quite the same. I guess I prefer the ACR approach because the layout is better suited for my workflow. I tend to finish up in PS, regardless so I do tend to find that I prefer the Bridge / ACR layout to the LR one. Things are less squished together in ACR. As well, I will use two other RAW converters - View NX2 and and DxO Optics Pro; neither of which play nice with LR...

My main use of LR is tethered shooting.

What I do use LR for is the Map module and I am playing around with the Book module as well. I find the Library module to not work for my workflow and find I have to work around it every time I use LR.

Re: Opinions on Lightroom

Originally Posted by chauncey

Aah...you can grab the left border of the develop module and pull it left to enlarge it.

Which unfortunately means you sacrifice some other aspect of the very limited screen real estate. I normally work with two screens and have the piece I am working on diplayed on the 27" screen and the PS panels on the other.

I would find LR a lot more useful if it were easier to pull apart and rearrange (rather than have bits and pieces hide / unhide). I've used LR since one of the later betas and have owned every version from 1 through to 5. I just wish Adobe would fix the UI (user interface) and make the Library module a bit more useful; I consider these to be the two components of LR that I really dislike,

Re: Opinions on Lightroom

Manfred,

If you have any questions about the Book module, especially as it pertains to sending a book to Blurb, don't hesitate to reach out to me. I've now produced two complete books using LR5 and Blurb, so I have a reasonable idea of what to expect, how to prevent issues, etc.